Couldn't agree more ... not good enough, everyone else has responded, it doesn't take long to say yes or no ?
For not replying to an important and legitimate enquiry under the FOI act.
Time for the Nuneaton MP to speak, http://www.marcusjones.org.uk/ what is his point of view.
Why shame on them? They've given a holding response which they're allowed to do under the act.
Not to the Trust AFAIK. And all that response says is "we don't give responses" surely that's not sufficient under the Act?
Seriously?
I'm always a bit of an idealist about govt transparency.
New ground in the same geographical area of the Ricoh - all our own revenues to invest into the team - where is the downside?
New ground in the same geographical area of the Ricoh - all our own revenues to invest into the team - where is the downside?
New ground in the same geographical area of the Ricoh - all our own revenues to invest into the team - where is the downside?
Apart from the mineshafts, bogs, poor infrastructure, unhappy local residents, addition to already massive debts, prefab stadium with a low capacity....what are the downsides ?New ground in the same geographical area of the Ricoh - all our own revenues to invest into the team - where is the downside?
Yes seriously. You know more about local govt stuff like this than me. I was seriously asking if that's sufficient under the act?
Seems a bit too broad, but I'm always a bit of an idealist about govt transparency.
If your request is turned down under the EIRs, the authority must apply a public interest test to demonstrate that it is in the public interest for the information to be refused (which is a very high hurdle, as remember that there is a presumption in favour of disclosure in both the FOI Act and the EIRs).
If your request is treated under the FOI Act, most exemptions need a public interest test as well, although some are absolute exemptions and there is no need for the authority to apply a public interest test.
The public interest test should be a balancing exercise of whether the public interest is best served by disclosure or exempting. A separate public interest test should be done for each exemption applied.
An example might be if you asked for information relating to land prices that could in the future be subject to compulsory purchase. If using the EIRs the authority would have to apply a public interest test in any event. If using the FOI the authority could apply the Section 43 relating to commercial interests. The authority would have to weigh up the public interest in each instance and give sound reasons. It is not enough for the authority to say that it believes the public interest lies in exempting; they have to say why.
Yes seriously. You know more about local govt stuff like this than me. I was seriously asking if that's sufficient under the act?
Seems a bit too broad, but I'm always a bit of an idealist about govt transparency.
Found this online:
EIR is the term for allowed exceptions. They could make an exception for commercial sensitivity but that would have to relate to specific points and they would have to justify when that exemption applies and why it isn't in the public interest to release the information. In our case in my opinion N&B could not refuse to confirm if they have been speaking with SISU but could make a case to not give details of any specific site, which wasn't asked for anyway.
And we never filled Highfield Road (even in the prem) - it's a modular design and the capacity can be increased if needed. Coventry City Council will not allow another stadium in Coventry - so therefore what options does the club have, it is clear we need the revenues to compete with other teams, especially if we want to play in the prem ever again, and as I understand it ACL are not prepared to sell the Ricoh to the club...so what would you suggest?
And we never filled Highfield Road (even in the prem) - it's a modular design and the capacity can be increased if needed. Coventry City Council will not allow another stadium in Coventry - so therefore what options does the club have, it is clear we need the revenues to compete with other teams, especially if we want to play in the prem ever again, and as I understand it ACL are not prepared to sell the Ricoh to the club...so what would you suggest?
i think you may be getting ahead of yourself.
Who says CCC wouldn't accept it?
ACL can't sell, but have offered rental terms.
At least read up a bit before posting.
Coventry City Council will not allow another stadium in Coventry - so therefore what options does the club have, it is clear we need the revenues to compete with other teams, especially if we want to play in the prem ever again, and as I understand it ACL are not prepared to sell the Ricoh to the club...so what would you suggest?
And we never filled Highfield Road (even in the prem) - it's a modular design and the capacity can be increased if needed. Coventry City Council will not allow another stadium in Coventry - so therefore what options does the club have, it is clear we need the revenues to compete with other teams, especially if we want to play in the prem ever again, and as I understand it ACL are not prepared to sell the Ricoh to the club...so what would you suggest?
Who says CCC wouldn't accept it?
ACL can't sell, but have offered rental terms.
At least read up a bit before posting.
Otium don't want a rental agreement though for the Ricoh they have said this.
Trusts Questions said:Q2. Have the council excluded any potential option to settle the dispute?
A2. No. Many options of course would require the consent of the other shareholder.
Coventry City Council would not be allowed to accept the building of another large stadium within it's boundaries, because of planning ecological and sustainability issues - and even if they could do you honestly believe they would give CCFC planning permission?
Can you would explain why ownership of a stadium freehold means they will invest in the team / club? They don't need to own the freehold at the Ricoh to access all the revenues, in fact the freehold generates zero revenue. I'm not sure how you are coming to the conclusion that owning the freehold will lead to investment in the team / club given that Joy has clearly stated that she has no interest in football and wants to get her, and her investors, money back.CCFC don't want to rent - they want the freehold so they can invest in the team/club - and at some point sell a tangible asset.
Coventry City Council would not be allowed to accept the building of another large stadium within it's boundaries, because of planning ecological and sustainability issues - and even if they could do you honestly believe they would give CCFC planning permission?
CCFC don't want to rent - they want the freehold so they can invest in the team/club - and at some point sell a tangible asset.
Stop trying being patronizing - especially when it seems you do not know what you are talking about.
they want the freehold so they can invest in the team/club
Where did Coventry City Council state they would not allow another stadium in Coventry? They can't turn down a planning application without a valid reason and 'we don't like SISU' is not a valid reason. Even if CCC did turn it down the appeal process would take it out of the hands of CCC.
Why do we need to own the stadium to get revenues? Past ACL rent offers have included access to matchday revenues, the new stadium will not have a casino, exhibition hall etc so we won't get additional revenues from other events at a new stadium.
ACL don't own the Ricoh to sell it to SISU. They own the lease and SISU have never made an offer to buy it. They did make an offer to buy the Higgs 50% which was accepted but SISU never completed hence why Higgs are taking legal action to recover their costs. They have never bid for the 50% share owned by CCC nor have they made an offer to CCC for purchase of the freehold.
The obvious solution here is to purchase the 50% owned by Higgs. That puts SISU in a much stronger postion when agreeing a new deal for CCFC. Then purchase the 50% off CCC, pay off the loan and restructure the lease to a rolling lease with peppercorn rent. SISU / CCFC then get all the revenues from the Ricoh and CCC retain the security of owning the freehold so that SISU can't sell it off or load debt against it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?